Maa Deoli Traders vs. State Of West Bengal And Ors.

Held

The Court held that, in view of the petitioner's conduct, specifically the delay in filing the writ petition and the failure to annex the impugned order, there was no scope to permit the petitioner to file a supplementary affidavit. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed. However, acknowledging that the appellate tribunal is yet to be constituted, the Court clarified that the dismissal of the writ petition would not preclude the petitioner from taking appropriate steps for redressal of grievances in accordance with law, provided they offer an appropriate explanation for the delay, if advised.

Facts

The petitioner, Maa Deoli Traders, filed a writ petition challenging an order passed under Section 107 of the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017, dated June 12, 2023. The petition was filed belatedly, and there was no adequate explanation for the delay. Furthermore, the impugned order was not annexed to the petition. The petitioner sought leave to file a supplementary affidavit to include the order. The Court, considering the petitioner's conduct, declined to permit the filing of the supplementary affidavit.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Court should permit the petitioner to file a supplementary affidavit to annex the impugned order, given the delay in filing the writ petition and the absence of the order in the original petition? The petitioner argued for the necessity of filing the supplementary affidavit to bring the impugned order on record, implying a desire to proceed with the challenge. The revenue/State did not record any specific arguments regarding the supplementary affidavit or the delay in the provided judgment.